Darwen councillor accuses MP ‘of misleading’ public over land plan

This Is Lancashire: Dave Smith Dave Smith

A LEADING Darwen Labour councillor has accused the town’s MP of ‘misleading’ the public over the allocation of a piece of land for 400 new homes.

Jake Berry has launched a petition calling for Bailey’s Field to be removed from the Local Plan, published by the borough council.

The plan is the council’s response to the Government’s house-building plan which ordered Blackburn with Darwen Council to allocate land for 9,400 new homes borough-wide.

Coun Dave Smith said: “In my opinion he is misleading the residents.

“I recently dug out the last district plan, which was published in 1995, and Bailey’s Field has been allocated for housing since then, if not before.

“Once a piece of land has been allocated it is very difficult to de-allocate, and the council has to allocate land for 9,400 homes whether it likes it or not.

“Where else does Mr Berry want these houses to be built?

“The land will most likely never be built on because of all the mineshafts, so it is better that it is allocated over somewhere that would attract developers.”

Comments (15)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:14pm Tue 4 Mar 14

hasslem hasslem says...

Not like a politician to be misleading is it Dave?

People still stopping you on the streets to voice their concern about raising the inheritance tax threshold?
Not like a politician to be misleading is it Dave? People still stopping you on the streets to voice their concern about raising the inheritance tax threshold? hasslem hasslem
  • Score: 6

1:08pm Tue 4 Mar 14

chargreaves says...

youre the ones misleading the public. we dont want houses on this field, arent you elected to represent us? at least our mp is backing local people whove made clear time and time again that this land shouldnt be included.
youre the ones misleading the public. we dont want houses on this field, arent you elected to represent us? at least our mp is backing local people whove made clear time and time again that this land shouldnt be included. chargreaves
  • Score: 10

2:26pm Tue 4 Mar 14

Mothernature says...

Have to agree with Dave Smith. Yes, the leaflet is misleading, especially to those who haven't lived in Darwen that long, but, as he says, the council has no choice but to offer up land that could potentially be built on. People need to see the bigger picture. To build on Baileys would be far too expensive. So much remedial work is needed before any builder could think about laying a foundation, therefore making it unprofitable. I'm 99.9% positive that's 400 houses that will not be built, so that's 400 off the list of 9,400. Now if we could nominate other areas that are full of mineshafts, we could drastically reduce the number of homes that are unlikely to ever be built.
Have to agree with Dave Smith. Yes, the leaflet is misleading, especially to those who haven't lived in Darwen that long, but, as he says, the council has no choice but to offer up land that could potentially be built on. People need to see the bigger picture. To build on Baileys would be far too expensive. So much remedial work is needed before any builder could think about laying a foundation, therefore making it unprofitable. I'm 99.9% positive that's 400 houses that will not be built, so that's 400 off the list of 9,400. Now if we could nominate other areas that are full of mineshafts, we could drastically reduce the number of homes that are unlikely to ever be built. Mothernature
  • Score: 0

3:12pm Tue 4 Mar 14

Darwen Malc says...

There is absolutely nothing wrong with Jake Berry getting a signed petition going to ensure that the strength of feeling is known and to try to get it removed from the plan. I feel it is misleading the public for you to say that it will never be built on. If housing is needed and other land is scarce, you bet they'll do whatever needs to be done and then build on it. And as you are someone who represents Labour, I resent you ever suggesting that someone from another party is being misleading when the biggest perpetrator of that was your leader Blair, when he said that Iraq had WMDs.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with Jake Berry getting a signed petition going to ensure that the strength of feeling is known and to try to get it removed from the plan. I feel it is misleading the public for you to say that it will never be built on. If housing is needed and other land is scarce, you bet they'll do whatever needs to be done and then build on it. And as you are someone who represents Labour, I resent you ever suggesting that someone from another party is being misleading when the biggest perpetrator of that was your leader Blair, when he said that Iraq had WMDs. Darwen Malc
  • Score: 5

4:40pm Tue 4 Mar 14

louderfasterlonger says...

Darwen Malc wrote:
There is absolutely nothing wrong with Jake Berry getting a signed petition going to ensure that the strength of feeling is known and to try to get it removed from the plan. I feel it is misleading the public for you to say that it will never be built on. If housing is needed and other land is scarce, you bet they'll do whatever needs to be done and then build on it. And as you are someone who represents Labour, I resent you ever suggesting that someone from another party is being misleading when the biggest perpetrator of that was your leader Blair, when he said that Iraq had WMDs.
You meander from the point a little. A petition will not be taken into account during the consultation unless a viable alternative is suggested on it. Jake is / should be aware of that. The government have come up with the 9400 figure and unless Jake persuades the government to reduce that to 9000 then his petition is useless, even if the queen herself signed it,
Jake has been deadly silent when asked for a viable alternative time and again from local councillors such as Dave Smith, who has lived in, and knows the area like the back of his hand.
[quote][p][bold]Darwen Malc[/bold] wrote: There is absolutely nothing wrong with Jake Berry getting a signed petition going to ensure that the strength of feeling is known and to try to get it removed from the plan. I feel it is misleading the public for you to say that it will never be built on. If housing is needed and other land is scarce, you bet they'll do whatever needs to be done and then build on it. And as you are someone who represents Labour, I resent you ever suggesting that someone from another party is being misleading when the biggest perpetrator of that was your leader Blair, when he said that Iraq had WMDs.[/p][/quote]You meander from the point a little. A petition will not be taken into account during the consultation unless a viable alternative is suggested on it. Jake is / should be aware of that. The government have come up with the 9400 figure and unless Jake persuades the government to reduce that to 9000 then his petition is useless, even if the queen herself signed it, Jake has been deadly silent when asked for a viable alternative time and again from local councillors such as Dave Smith, who has lived in, and knows the area like the back of his hand. louderfasterlonger
  • Score: 4

4:46pm Tue 4 Mar 14

english rose 1 says...

chargreaves wrote:
youre the ones misleading the public. we dont want houses on this field, arent you elected to represent us? at least our mp is backing local people whove made clear time and time again that this land shouldnt be included.
But as the article states the land has been allocated for housing since at least 1995. Did Mr Berry tell you that ?? I know the land around there and it is highly unlikely to be built on due to the shafts, poor ground etc;
*
So the question is chargreaves, - where would you allocate the 400 homes ? Which location have you recommended to the Inspector ? C'mon, please don't be shy in telling everyone ? Blacksnape Playing Fields maybe ?
[quote][p][bold]chargreaves[/bold] wrote: youre the ones misleading the public. we dont want houses on this field, arent you elected to represent us? at least our mp is backing local people whove made clear time and time again that this land shouldnt be included.[/p][/quote]But as the article states the land has been allocated for housing since at least 1995. Did Mr Berry tell you that ?? I know the land around there and it is highly unlikely to be built on due to the shafts, poor ground etc; * So the question is chargreaves, - where would you allocate the 400 homes ? Which location have you recommended to the Inspector ? C'mon, please don't be shy in telling everyone ? Blacksnape Playing Fields maybe ? english rose 1
  • Score: 0

4:48pm Tue 4 Mar 14

english rose 1 says...

hasslem hasslem wrote:
Not like a politician to be misleading is it Dave?

People still stopping you on the streets to voice their concern about raising the inheritance tax threshold?
Are you referring to the events around the parish council / planning scandal in Newchurch Village, Pendle ?!
[quote][p][bold]hasslem hasslem[/bold] wrote: Not like a politician to be misleading is it Dave? People still stopping you on the streets to voice their concern about raising the inheritance tax threshold?[/p][/quote]Are you referring to the events around the parish council / planning scandal in Newchurch Village, Pendle ?! english rose 1
  • Score: -8

5:33pm Tue 4 Mar 14

hasslem hasslem says...

louderfasterlonger wrote:
Darwen Malc wrote:
There is absolutely nothing wrong with Jake Berry getting a signed petition going to ensure that the strength of feeling is known and to try to get it removed from the plan. I feel it is misleading the public for you to say that it will never be built on. If housing is needed and other land is scarce, you bet they'll do whatever needs to be done and then build on it. And as you are someone who represents Labour, I resent you ever suggesting that someone from another party is being misleading when the biggest perpetrator of that was your leader Blair, when he said that Iraq had WMDs.
You meander from the point a little. A petition will not be taken into account during the consultation unless a viable alternative is suggested on it. Jake is / should be aware of that. The government have come up with the 9400 figure and unless Jake persuades the government to reduce that to 9000 then his petition is useless, even if the queen herself signed it,
Jake has been deadly silent when asked for a viable alternative time and again from local councillors such as Dave Smith, who has lived in, and knows the area like the back of his hand.
i know where his hand has been - ugh!
[quote][p][bold]louderfasterlonger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Darwen Malc[/bold] wrote: There is absolutely nothing wrong with Jake Berry getting a signed petition going to ensure that the strength of feeling is known and to try to get it removed from the plan. I feel it is misleading the public for you to say that it will never be built on. If housing is needed and other land is scarce, you bet they'll do whatever needs to be done and then build on it. And as you are someone who represents Labour, I resent you ever suggesting that someone from another party is being misleading when the biggest perpetrator of that was your leader Blair, when he said that Iraq had WMDs.[/p][/quote]You meander from the point a little. A petition will not be taken into account during the consultation unless a viable alternative is suggested on it. Jake is / should be aware of that. The government have come up with the 9400 figure and unless Jake persuades the government to reduce that to 9000 then his petition is useless, even if the queen herself signed it, Jake has been deadly silent when asked for a viable alternative time and again from local councillors such as Dave Smith, who has lived in, and knows the area like the back of his hand.[/p][/quote]i know where his hand has been - ugh! hasslem hasslem
  • Score: 8

5:37pm Tue 4 Mar 14

CorkyMac says...

english rose 1 wrote:
chargreaves wrote:
youre the ones misleading the public. we dont want houses on this field, arent you elected to represent us? at least our mp is backing local people whove made clear time and time again that this land shouldnt be included.
But as the article states the land has been allocated for housing since at least 1995. Did Mr Berry tell you that ?? I know the land around there and it is highly unlikely to be built on due to the shafts, poor ground etc;
*
So the question is chargreaves, - where would you allocate the 400 homes ? Which location have you recommended to the Inspector ? C'mon, please don't be shy in telling everyone ? Blacksnape Playing Fields maybe ?
You have responded to two comments English Rose, why not respond to Darwen Malc regarding Tony Blair misleading the British Public re Iraq. All friggin main parties are liars, but the mention of the Labour Party makes me laugh, you're a disgrace to this Country nationally and locally for the bull$hit you lot come out with. If Darwen people have any sense they will keep you lot out knowing the mess you've made of Blackburn.
[quote][p][bold]english rose 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]chargreaves[/bold] wrote: youre the ones misleading the public. we dont want houses on this field, arent you elected to represent us? at least our mp is backing local people whove made clear time and time again that this land shouldnt be included.[/p][/quote]But as the article states the land has been allocated for housing since at least 1995. Did Mr Berry tell you that ?? I know the land around there and it is highly unlikely to be built on due to the shafts, poor ground etc; * So the question is chargreaves, - where would you allocate the 400 homes ? Which location have you recommended to the Inspector ? C'mon, please don't be shy in telling everyone ? Blacksnape Playing Fields maybe ?[/p][/quote]You have responded to two comments English Rose, why not respond to Darwen Malc regarding Tony Blair misleading the British Public re Iraq. All friggin main parties are liars, but the mention of the Labour Party makes me laugh, you're a disgrace to this Country nationally and locally for the bull$hit you lot come out with. If Darwen people have any sense they will keep you lot out knowing the mess you've made of Blackburn. CorkyMac
  • Score: 1

8:35pm Tue 4 Mar 14

happycyclist says...

chargreaves wrote:
youre the ones misleading the public. we dont want houses on this field, arent you elected to represent us? at least our mp is backing local people whove made clear time and time again that this land shouldnt be included.
Dave Smith has been a local councillor and lived in Darwen for donkey's years. Jake Berry probably hadn't even heard of Darwen until 2010.

The land isn't going to be built on. It would cost too much to stabilise the land. So it IS better to use this land as part of Darwen's allocation for houses. Better to have allocated land that isn't going to be built on than a different site allocated in Darwen for 400 houses that will be built on, don't you think? Or is that beyond your intellect?

Jake Berry is shamelessly electioneering.
[quote][p][bold]chargreaves[/bold] wrote: youre the ones misleading the public. we dont want houses on this field, arent you elected to represent us? at least our mp is backing local people whove made clear time and time again that this land shouldnt be included.[/p][/quote]Dave Smith has been a local councillor and lived in Darwen for donkey's years. Jake Berry probably hadn't even heard of Darwen until 2010. The land isn't going to be built on. It would cost too much to stabilise the land. So it IS better to use this land as part of Darwen's allocation for houses. Better to have allocated land that isn't going to be built on than a different site allocated in Darwen for 400 houses that will be built on, don't you think? Or is that beyond your intellect? Jake Berry is shamelessly electioneering. happycyclist
  • Score: 3

9:32am Wed 5 Mar 14

Paul Ton says...

Hasslem Hasslem does well to point out the hypocrisy with this particular councillor. Now, remind me, who was the local Labour councillor who was involved in the inappropriate use of PCs to view "adult material"?
Hasslem Hasslem does well to point out the hypocrisy with this particular councillor. Now, remind me, who was the local Labour councillor who was involved in the inappropriate use of PCs to view "adult material"? Paul Ton
  • Score: 3

12:39pm Wed 5 Mar 14

Progressive Penguin says...

Paul Ton wrote:
Hasslem Hasslem does well to point out the hypocrisy with this particular councillor. Now, remind me, who was the local Labour councillor who was involved in the inappropriate use of PCs to view "adult material"?
grow up!
[quote][p][bold]Paul Ton[/bold] wrote: Hasslem Hasslem does well to point out the hypocrisy with this particular councillor. Now, remind me, who was the local Labour councillor who was involved in the inappropriate use of PCs to view "adult material"?[/p][/quote]grow up! Progressive Penguin
  • Score: -4

12:40pm Wed 5 Mar 14

Progressive Penguin says...

Darwen Malc wrote:
There is absolutely nothing wrong with Jake Berry getting a signed petition going to ensure that the strength of feeling is known and to try to get it removed from the plan. I feel it is misleading the public for you to say that it will never be built on. If housing is needed and other land is scarce, you bet they'll do whatever needs to be done and then build on it. And as you are someone who represents Labour, I resent you ever suggesting that someone from another party is being misleading when the biggest perpetrator of that was your leader Blair, when he said that Iraq had WMDs.
So Tony Blair alledgedly lying (coz that's never actually been proved BTW) means that the Tories are saints who never lie? Beautiful Logic
[quote][p][bold]Darwen Malc[/bold] wrote: There is absolutely nothing wrong with Jake Berry getting a signed petition going to ensure that the strength of feeling is known and to try to get it removed from the plan. I feel it is misleading the public for you to say that it will never be built on. If housing is needed and other land is scarce, you bet they'll do whatever needs to be done and then build on it. And as you are someone who represents Labour, I resent you ever suggesting that someone from another party is being misleading when the biggest perpetrator of that was your leader Blair, when he said that Iraq had WMDs.[/p][/quote]So Tony Blair alledgedly lying (coz that's never actually been proved BTW) means that the Tories are saints who never lie? Beautiful Logic Progressive Penguin
  • Score: 0

3:19pm Wed 5 Mar 14

lady vera fart teller says...

english rose 1 wrote:
chargreaves wrote:
youre the ones misleading the public. we dont want houses on this field, arent you elected to represent us? at least our mp is backing local people whove made clear time and time again that this land shouldnt be included.
But as the article states the land has been allocated for housing since at least 1995. Did Mr Berry tell you that ?? I know the land around there and it is highly unlikely to be built on due to the shafts, poor ground etc;
*
So the question is chargreaves, - where would you allocate the 400 homes ? Which location have you recommended to the Inspector ? C'mon, please don't be shy in telling everyone ? Blacksnape Playing Fields maybe ?
Surprise surprise - English Rose defending the Sunnyhurst Sandanista, yet again. Come on Rose - admit it - you're giving councillor Smith one, aren't you! If he's on you the amount on time you're on here supporting him he'll never have the time for councilling! Hasslem Hasslem - now we really know where the councillor's hand's been!
[quote][p][bold]english rose 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]chargreaves[/bold] wrote: youre the ones misleading the public. we dont want houses on this field, arent you elected to represent us? at least our mp is backing local people whove made clear time and time again that this land shouldnt be included.[/p][/quote]But as the article states the land has been allocated for housing since at least 1995. Did Mr Berry tell you that ?? I know the land around there and it is highly unlikely to be built on due to the shafts, poor ground etc; * So the question is chargreaves, - where would you allocate the 400 homes ? Which location have you recommended to the Inspector ? C'mon, please don't be shy in telling everyone ? Blacksnape Playing Fields maybe ?[/p][/quote]Surprise surprise - English Rose defending the Sunnyhurst Sandanista, yet again. Come on Rose - admit it - you're giving councillor Smith one, aren't you! If he's on you the amount on time you're on here supporting him he'll never have the time for councilling! Hasslem Hasslem - now we really know where the councillor's hand's been! lady vera fart teller
  • Score: -3

3:25pm Wed 5 Mar 14

Paul Ton says...

lady vera **** teller wrote:
english rose 1 wrote:
chargreaves wrote:
youre the ones misleading the public. we dont want houses on this field, arent you elected to represent us? at least our mp is backing local people whove made clear time and time again that this land shouldnt be included.
But as the article states the land has been allocated for housing since at least 1995. Did Mr Berry tell you that ?? I know the land around there and it is highly unlikely to be built on due to the shafts, poor ground etc;
*
So the question is chargreaves, - where would you allocate the 400 homes ? Which location have you recommended to the Inspector ? C'mon, please don't be shy in telling everyone ? Blacksnape Playing Fields maybe ?
Surprise surprise - English Rose defending the Sunnyhurst Sandanista, yet again. Come on Rose - admit it - you're giving councillor Smith one, aren't you! If he's on you the amount on time you're on here supporting him he'll never have the time for councilling! Hasslem Hasslem - now we really know where the councillor's hand's been!
And, going off the councillor's photo, we know where Rose's hand's been - tickling his chins!
[quote][p][bold]lady vera **** teller[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]english rose 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]chargreaves[/bold] wrote: youre the ones misleading the public. we dont want houses on this field, arent you elected to represent us? at least our mp is backing local people whove made clear time and time again that this land shouldnt be included.[/p][/quote]But as the article states the land has been allocated for housing since at least 1995. Did Mr Berry tell you that ?? I know the land around there and it is highly unlikely to be built on due to the shafts, poor ground etc; * So the question is chargreaves, - where would you allocate the 400 homes ? Which location have you recommended to the Inspector ? C'mon, please don't be shy in telling everyone ? Blacksnape Playing Fields maybe ?[/p][/quote]Surprise surprise - English Rose defending the Sunnyhurst Sandanista, yet again. Come on Rose - admit it - you're giving councillor Smith one, aren't you! If he's on you the amount on time you're on here supporting him he'll never have the time for councilling! Hasslem Hasslem - now we really know where the councillor's hand's been![/p][/quote]And, going off the councillor's photo, we know where Rose's hand's been - tickling his chins! Paul Ton
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree